Agenda for NTP at IETF-95
agenda-95-ntp-4

NTP/TICTOC joint meeting
5 April 2016
Samuel Weiler as scribe

Karen gave an update on WG status. There have been two new RFCs since IETF 94.
RFC 7821 UDP Checksum Complement in the Network Time Protocol (NTP)
RFC 7822 Network Time Protocol Version 4 (NTPv4) Extension Fields
Congratulations to Tal Mizrahi and Danny Mayer for this work.

Kristof gave an update on NTS, consistent with the slideware.
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/95/slides/slides-95-ntp-3.pdf

Sam (your scribe): what's the use case for client/mutual auth?  Are we
just creating an unneeded/unused code path?

Kristof: paid service.

Jared: cost of hardware for NTP is so low that the idea of a paid
service is not commercially viable.  Can't imagine a case where we
need this in the protocol (v. IP filtering).  This just adds complexity
and opportunities for abuse.

Harlan: re: why do server auth: [didn't understand answer]

Karen proposes to set up a design team to resolve some of these
issues.  Send her mail if you're interested.

Brian Haberman (AD): asks that Karen be clear about what design team
is dealing with, and tell the WG that. Karen: is it okay if we say
"address WGLC comments"?  Brian: Yes, if it is scoped that narrowly.

Sharon Goldberg: Why do we have periodic server seed refresh?
(address this in design team?)

Karen: send that one to the list.

Karen: send any other issues to the list NOW, so we can assign them to
the design team, if appropriate.

--

Denis gave an update on the NTP BCP.  
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/95/slides/slides-95-ntp-2.pdf
Karen asked when Denis thought this might be ready for WGLC; 
Denis thinks MAYBE in July.

Harlan spoke sans slides, giving some background on the i-do,
last-extension, and mac-extension-field drafts. Danny continued the
discussion of the mac-extension-field draft.  Karen: does it make
sense to combine these?  Danny believes they are stand-alone.  Eric
Raymond thinks this design looks good; he'll supply a second
interoperable implementation.

Harlan, again sans slideware, gave short briefs on his three REFID
drafts.  Sharon asks if nonces are per-client or reused. Harlan
expects them to be per-client. Sharon sees issues with backwards
compatibility. Sharon counter-proposes that since a client knows where
it got its time, it can put put jibberish in REFIDs EXCEPT if it gets
asked for time by the server it knows it's using.  Harlan says that
might work, but he's not sure. Karen asks Sharon to summarize this on
list, and Harlan and Sharon to work on a combined statement.

Karen thinks these docs can proceed independently.

--

TICTOC WG

Karen gave a briefing on doc status summarized below: 
IESG Processing (completed IETF Last Call)
 - draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-mib-07
 - IESG telechat: 2016-04-21
Completed WGLC (awaiting shepherd writeup)
 - draft-ietf-tictoc-multi-path-synchronization-03
 - draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls-07
Ready for WGLC
 - draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-enterprise-profile-05

There has been a liaison statement on management received from 
ITU-T SG 15. This liaison provides information on the management 
model work related to synchronization networks being developed in 
that group. This is part of the coordination effort of several 
standards groups related to management of synchronization networks 
and protocols. No action on the liaison is required at this time. 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1461/

Yuanlong Jiang presented on a YANG data model for IEEE 1588v2.  No one
in the room admitted to having read the document. Karen suggests
taking this to the list because the prople who might be paying
attention aren't in the meeting today. Karen explains that this may,
at some point, be fully transferred to 1588.

Yuanlong Jiang also presented on Scalable Synchronization Networks
(SCSN) Problems and Analysis. Karen pointed out that there is a
separate mailing list set up for this week; 5-6 people in the room are
aware of that list. Karen does not think adding this to the
(rechartered) WG's work plan is wise. Brian Haberman asks how much
this as been discussed with OPS/MGT folks. Brian would like to avoid
point solutions for different protocols. Karen suggests pulling
OPS/MGT types into the conversation on that mailing list.

--

Next steps.

Suresh will be the new AD.

Karen plans to continue monthly virtual interim schedule. Recharter
will presumably include NTPv4 items but not NTPv5 (yet). There are
several holes left in the current documentation set, including
interleave and mode 6. There are opportunities for those newer to the
IETF to edit documents. Karen is supportive of using little drafts to
clarify and correct issues.

Next virtual interim will be May 5th.